Getting SEV to work with linux

[AstralWanderer]

Imperator Fyron said:
You have to be extremely paranoid to think that MS would stop activation of XP before the planned product life cycle is up.

Why? It carries an obvious financial benefit for them and as Vista's DRM-heavy architecture has shown, Microsoft has relatively little concern for end-users.

Of course, you don't need to take my word for it - Microsoft's own FAQ has the less-than-100% reassurance "Microsoft will also support the activation of Windows XP throughout its life and will likely provide an update that turns activation off at the end of the product's lifecycle" If it was their intention to provide a cast-iron guarantee, why use such vague wording?

parabolize said:That would only force them to either kill WPA or not use XP. It would not force anyone to use Vista.

Knowledgeable and technical users could use hacks to disable WPA. The vast majority of computer users wouldn't fall into this category.

It certainly would be a PR-disaster for Microsoft but so, arguably, was the introduction of product activation. Given the higher prices charged for Vista and the tighter licensing, the financial benefits are greater and the limited scope for future growth (most people who would/could run Windows already doing so) means that Microsoft's future finances depend more on upgrades, voluntary or not.

[Fyron]

Current machine upgrades have never been a big source of profit for MS. Most of their OS sales come from licenses on brand new PCs. It doesn't make any sense for MS to kill XP activation prematurely. Doing so will not sell more copies of Vista; manufacturers selling PCs are what will sell more copies of Vista.

The vast majority of computer owners have never installed an OS, and never will. You don't even need to run WPA when you first run Windows on a new machine (at least, for laptops from Dell); most people have never even used WPA in the first place. The very small subset of people that have installed OSes is very much intersected by the subset that can install a hack to bypass WPA. Killing XP activation prematurely provides no financial benefit whatsoever to Microsoft. Nada, zilch.

Don't use DRM as a boogeyman like some trade groups use piracy... it doesn't help your argument.

Your quote from the FAQ even supports my point that MS wouldn't arbitrarily and prematurely stop activating new installations of XP... Again, the end of XP's lifecycle is at least 5 years after they stop selling licenses for it. Even if they don't provide an update to remove WPA, we are at a minimum 6 years from that point. How many new installations of XP will there be in 6 years?

[AstralWanderer]

Imperator Fyron said:
Current machine upgrades have never been a big source of profit for MS. Most of their OS sales come from licenses on brand new PCs.

While you are correct to point out that the majority of Windows sales come from new PCs (only 10% being retail according to this article), 10% of $13.2bn (Windows sales for 2006) can hardly be considered pocket change. Business users on volume licence programs are not included in that figure so the upgrade market could end up considerably larger.

Imperator Fyron said:Killing XP activation prematurely provides no financial benefit whatsoever to Microsoft. Nada, zilch.

Now this is hyperbole taken to an extreme. First of all, that 10% figure above is a significant benefit. Secondly, most families now already have a computer so even if they purchase a new one, they could still be affected by a forced upgrade for their older system.

Imperator Fyron said:Your quote from the FAQ even supports my point that MS wouldn't arbitrarily and prematurely stop activating new installations of XP... Again, the end of XP's lifecycle is at least 5 years after they stop selling licenses for it.

XP's lifecycle is whatever Microsoft chooses to make it, nothing more. That FAQ is worded in a way that allows them to drop XP activation tomorrow and that alone should be enough to cause concern. Product activation (and DRM generally) allows one side to set, change and enforce terms arbitrarily and while WPA isn't the most serious example, it is certainly capable of being used to consumers' disadvantage.

[Fyron]

You seem to have glossed over the assertion that the segment of the computer using population that installs OSes on their own is very much intersected by the segment of the population that can download and use a crack for WPA, in the extremely unrealistic event that MS decides to stop allowing activations for it prematurely. Noone will be forced to upgrade to Vista in this manner.

Now this is hyperbole taken to an extreme.

The only hyperbole is your entire premise. I don't feel like repeating myself again; I just hope noone else is fooled by these tired anti-MS arguments with no basis in reality.

[AstralWanderer]

Imperator Fyron said:
You seem to have glossed over the assertion that the segment of the computer using population that installs OSes on their own is very much intersected by the segment of the population that can download and use a crack for WPA,

Looking over the previous posts, I was puzzled at your focus on those who had installed OSes and I've now just seen your reasoning.

You seem to think activation only occurs during Windows installation.

This however is not the case - sufficient hardware changes will trigger the need for re-activation (see AumHa: Windows Product Activation for details). So if Microsoft stops XP activations, everyone running an XP system, pre-installed or not, will have to either upgrade to Vista, find a way to disable WPA or be extremely cautious about any hardware changes (especially for motherboards with integrated NICs).

Whether Microsoft will actually do this is speculation but what should be clear is that (a) Microsoft can do it and (b) Microsoft will profit greatly from doing it. Even if you assume that every home user finds and applies a WPA crack, you still have business users who are unlikely to risk this. And they will have to buy retail copies rather than heavily discounted OEM versions.

This however should be enough on activation - it is one reason for moving to GNU/Linux (or another free OS) and the increasingly heavy-handed DRM in Vista will strengthen this. As such it is in all game developers' interests to ensure that their wares work under Wine at the very least.

[Fyron]

I do not think activation only occurs when you first install the OS. It takes some massive hardware changes to trigger WPA (even your link says so). Most computer users do not upgrade internal hardware any more than they buy retail OS disks (especially when you talk about parts like motherboards and cpus)... they just buy whole OEM PCs when they upgrade. I still posit that a large majority of (computer-owning) people have never needed to activate XP and thus would never be subject to the termination of XP activations. Microsoft would not profit much at all from terminating XP activations.

Business users with volume licensed XP would certainly move to volume licensed Vista, not retail copies of Vista. Why would they not get volume licensing for Vista if they had to upgrade? Unless you are talking about small business owners that do not qualify for volume licensing... in which case, the same exact ecosystem of buying whole new OEM PCs and not doing piecemeal upgrades tends to apply exactly the same as it does for home users.

Product activation is an invalid reason to switch to Linux. There are good reasons to do so, but completely unrealistic paranoia about MS cutting off activation of XP is certainly not one of them. And again with the DRM boogeyman... In all likelihood, you are probably doing Linux adoption a disservice by perpetuating the WPA/DRM scare tactics...

[capnq]

Imperator Fyron said: It takes some massive hardware changes to trigger WPA

I have heard reports of it being triggered by such "major" changes as adding more RAM. (I could have sworn it was on a thread in these forums, but I can't find it now.)

I don't trust Microsoft to judge what constitutes a "major" hardware upgrade. I don't trust Microsoft to judge what software ought to automatically be downloaded to my computer. I don't use Microsoft products any more than absolutely necessary.

Some of the features that I've heard are included in both XP and Vista have convinced me to never voluntarily install either one.